| In recent years,due to the debtor’s inability to repay his debts on time,in order to resolve the contradiction between the debtor and the creditor,the two sides often reach an agreement to sign a debt in kind agreement to pay off the creditor’s rights and debts.This is also one of the common ways for both parties to settle their claims and debts peacefully.At present,when the civil code is being compiled,how to conduct in-depth research on the above issues in order to resolve disputes and maintain social stability is an important research topic in the current field.Through the study of the housing sales contract dispute case of zhang xx v.company a,this paper is conducive to the improvement of related problems in the field of contract,and at the same time,to solve the dilemma of different judgments in the same case in judicial trials.In addition,it is helpful to improve the case handling efficiency of the judicial organs in solving similar disputes,and it is also of typical significance in determining the nature and effectiveness of the debt-for-goods agreement.Through the analysis of this case,it can be seen that this case involves the following three controversial focuses: first,how to determine the case,second,how to determine the effectiveness of the agreement in the commitment letter,and third,how to determine the value of the house involved.The following conclusions can be drawnbased on the dispute focus of this case and legal analysis: first,on how to determine the cause of a dispute caused by a debt agreement based on material,it is generally believed that the substantive legal relationship of the case should be the main criterion for determining the cause of the case,the claim is the secondary criterion,and the subject matter is another auxiliary criterion.Second,the agreement of debt in kind can be regarded as a transaction arrangement between the parties,and its nature is considered to be a reasonable change of debt.The agreement is the real expression of the parties’ intention,and if it does not violate the legal provisions,the agreement shall be deemed to be valid.Third,in the agreement of matter-of-substance debt repayment,the matter-of-substance not only includes movable property and immovable property,but also includes special movable property,etc.The transfer of ownership of the matter-of-substance should be regulated according to the general rules of the property law of the People’s Republic of China.Fourth,due to the time difference between the signing and performance of the debt-for-goods agreement,there is a difference between the actual value of the debt-for-goods agreement and the value of the debt-for-goods agreement when the debtor performs his obligations.In most cases,the value of the debt repayment is usually determined according to the price agreed by both parties.If the agreed price between the parties is too high or too low,the court should review this and hire a third party institution todetermine the value of the debt repayment.Through the study of these issues,the author hopes to provide some feasible opinions for the courts to hear similar cases and the compilation of civil code in practice. |
